New Inductance

Gave us:


Stop top posting, you retarded twit.
The transformer is a long rectangle with the primary at one end and the secondary at the other. ALL flux is transferred via the core. Once and only once.
That last line pegs you squarely as a loon.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Roy L. Fuchs wrote:

transformin dc!? fool
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 15 Jul 2006 13:49:55 -0700, "my mother"

Actually, it is quite possible, and is the very basis for how a car ignition coil works.
A standing DC field is placed on the "transformer" and upon release of the DC current, the field snaps back down and the collapse yields a stepped up voltage at the secondary.
Got clue?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

At that point it isn't DC anymore since it is duty cycled......That would be a square wave would it not?....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thank you, I tell you where you can see a lobotomised nude lady human robot dancing in a sexy idiot dancing show. Morely college London, You might need a pass to get past the guard and you might end up as one yourself.
They generally have to catch her after and re-attach her lead otherwise she skips off down the street to play with her toys.
Chris.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What nonsense. Increase frequency, reduce core flux for a given voltage and number of turns , so make a smaller core at the original flux density. Nothing to do with Chris's rubbish. Much to do with Faraday.
--

Don Kelly snipped-for-privacy@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The frequency distribution of the photons emitted from a light bulb is totally *unrelated* to the frequency of the AC current flowing through the filament.
The only way to double the frequency of the 'average' photon from an incandescent light bulb is to change the filament's temperature. For a flourescent bulb, you would need to change out the internal gas.
But neither would require changes in the applied current's frequency.
daestrom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
----------------------------

1)What photons? Their presence in transformer action, "virtual" or not, is a conjecture which requires a leap of faith without justification. Does that mean that increasing the temperature of the transformer increases the power transfer due to increased photon emission? [no]. Can one make a transformer such that any possible photon path between windings is blocked but the transformer still works? [yes] 2)Note that doubling the supply frequency does not increase the power transfer in a transformer. The effect of frequency on any given transformer is well known and covered in many texts. 3) As I said before, from Faraday, you can come up with (as does any basic text on Electromagnetic machines) a relationship between voltage, magnetic flux, frequency and turns. No photons needed. Note that the relationship does NOT involve power or need to invoke (incorrectly) quantum mechanics. 4) Considering the characteristics of the magnetic core, then it is also easy to show that there is an ampere turn balance. Taking this into account with (3), you end up with a power transfer relationship which , lo and behold, incidentally agrees with conservation of energy. Do these non-quantum approaches work? [extremely well]. Are they simpler to use? [very much so].
Quantum mechanics is all very well but there are areas, and this is one, where this tool is not appropriate.
--

Don Kelly snipped-for-privacy@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gave us:

Nope. He is merely making shit up as he goes along.
Remember, this is the twit that wants us to place "some flux" in an envelope and send it to him.
He lacks some *very* basic electrical theory understanding to make statements like that.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Phat Bytestard wrote:

When I used to work for Boeing, these were the guys we'd send out to fetch a bucket of prop wash.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto: snipped-for-privacy@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:30:32 -0700, "Paul Hovnanian P.E."

I was only fooled once. A co-worker gave me a small screw with buggered up threads on it, and told me to go ask the supervisor to "cram" it, stating that he had a screw crammer that would straighten out the threads. Turns out such tools do exist, but the boss, and the boys had a different agenda with me.
They got REAL mad when I drew Secretariat in the pool. I friggin won too, and they ripped me off for the loot. Me, a kid, didn't even know I got screwed. They gave me $20, and it was supposed to be like $80 or more (a lot back then).
So much for my story of humility. Boss still liked me though.
Polishing huge stainless steel plates to a grade 6 surface quality for use by Proctor and Gamble, and the food industry to make food processing tanks out of. Sheets... bars... you name it.
I learned a lot about the world learning about surface quality and the like. I think it would a lot of guys good to learn such things on the way up.
Why does english work in billiards? What? Not an instantaneous clack and rebound when the balls hit? No? Really?
The phrase for today is:
Modulus of Elasticity
Not to mention:
Coefficient of Friction
Stainless steel is some neat stuff!
Jus' grindin' out the pits...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This reminds me of some english textbook long ago... "The boss told me to get a glass nail, a left handed screwdriver and a can of striped paint". "Just stop and think for a minute, lad!"
-- Tzortzakakis Dimitrios major in electrical engineering,freelance electrician 542nd mechanized infantry batallion dimtzort AT otenet DOT gr
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Sky hook and wire stretcher comes to mind...

-
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As sailors in the Navy, we used all sorts of tricks like that on the newbie.
Some of the more famous... 1) Fetch me some relative bearing grease 2) I need ten feet of water line. 3) We drew straws and you have the mail bouy watch.
daestrom
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
----------------------------
remove the X to answer
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
----------------------------

Yes some of the questions are rhetorical. You know the limits of circuit theory. You know the advantages of it where it is valid. As far as a magnetic field being dependent on moving electric fields - no problem (in fact this is a common derivation) Now the interaction of charged particles may well be due to particles -i.e the virtual photon which is: a)not observable, b)an artifact of perturbation theory, c)may not even exist except as a useful QED technique. I have no problem with this. As to magnetic fields existing-they do and can be measured and analysed. The fact that the effect called magnetism is caused by something else doesn't make it unreal. I also note that some discussions of virtual photons try to explain them in terms of waves, simplifying by ignoring magnetic moments. In addition several quantum mechanics effects involve, directly, the use of magnetic flux density-why?- because it is useful.
Now, as to electromechanical energy conversion, assuming that what you imply by M;w and E:w as mechanical and electrical energy then one approach used in the analysis of electromagnetic devices such as motors/transformer and relays is conservation of energy along with the idea of virtual work (a form of perturbation) . Then :
change of mech energy out =f*delta(x) =change of electrical energy in + change in magnetic energy stored +change in losses.
White & Woodson, of MIT in "Electromechanical Energy Conversion" dealt with generalised machine models, involving use of the Hamiltonian and coordinate transforms. Both electrostatic and electromagnetic conversion were considered. Much of this was picked up by later authors. Gabriel Kron also wrote a very difficult to follow text using tensor analysis. While these authors were well aware of GR and Quantum mechanics, they did not deal with them because there was no need to do so.
Certainly, in terms of semiconductors, quantum theory and energy levels are important but for typical machines, classical electrodynamics is quite adequate. It may well be that for nanomachines, this is not the case.
However, you appear to want to deal with GR and energy conversion- The relationsips between GR and classical electrodynamics probably cover it.
However, any exposure that I have had to GR, QED etc was quite a while ago and I cannot and will not claim any expertise in those areas. Will I learn more? Possibly, because of curiosity. Will I argue with the Real Chris- probably not--not worth the effort.
--

Don Kelly snipped-for-privacy@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
----------------------------

The magnetic field may well be a convenience but it is what can be measured, modified and controlled. A virtual proton which may well be its cause is not subject to any of these factors. We are not measuring its origin. We don't actually know the relative velocity of the particles but only the effect. The question is, "what is real?" Is it what we can sense or is it the postulated basic mechanism?. All I am suggesting is that the effect -i.e. what is commonly called a magnetic field or "region of magnetic influence" exists. A car hits a pole because the driver is drunk. The cause is the drunkedness of the driver, the effect is the collision. Is the latter not real because it is not the prime cause? (There is also a relative velocity involved which definitely has a real effect on the results of the collision :))
As far as classical vs quantum ideas, what conditions are required so that the quantisation can be detected?
I don't claim to know the answers -from some reading, I have some idea but ???
--

Don Kelly snipped-for-privacy@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I admit the analogy was badly crippled-I haven't one that isn't. However, I do not have the same concern with regard to "relative" that you have. I do see what you are getting at and -yes- if one's velocity is the same as that of the moving charge- then one cannot observe the motion or effects of the motion and will not see a magnetic field. In that case, all one sees is an electrostatic field. fair enough. Does that make a magnetic field "imaginary" ? Possibly what is "real" depends on ones reference frame but we all work within our own reference frame which is rarely that of a moving charge (instantaneous velocity=??or a particle with 0 rest mass, momentum, and evanescent existence- possibly as a wave existing everywhere at once). An alternator (you know by now that my background is in machines and power- not electronics) is analysed on a reference frame that is rotating and the results can be tranformed to a stationary reference frame -in terms of what can be measured from outside without getting dizzy. Is this real? I think so. However there may be many aspects of reality- Kron dealt with this using tensor analysis and I once read a delightful and poetic book on relativity which also used tensor analysis. Photo electric effect, Millikan, quantum effects in semiconductors, tunnel diodes, etc. do support "quantum" ideas which are more basic than continuum ideas. However, where do the lines blur? I would suggest, as have others, that for the majority of situations, as has been indicated by others, that most protons, virtual or otherwise are low energy and classical methods work just as well. Going back to a previous rhetorical question, one could use full blown EM theory to solve a circuit problem-getting the same result, with much more work, than using circuit theory which is a quasi-static approximation. Continuum models may be a "quasi-static" approximation in the case of multiple particle interactions at multiple individual energy levels-resulting is a statistical blur with an immeasurable standard deviation- i.e. reduced to a deterministic model. Heisenberg uncertainty covers a lot of evils for an individual particle (even the direction of force involved with a virtual photon). Quantisation exists but we have no way that we can actually make use of this on a gross level.
The problem with an inductor or transformer is that we are in this multi-particle, multi-energy situation. We could, in theory, come up with a multidimension model requiring, at least, an nxn matrix where n is in the order of quadrillions+. Now replace this with the result: "B" Convenient, very much so. Real? Apparently physics, even quantum physics, treats it as such. Does it go away if no-one is looking -after all, isn't that implicit in quantum mechanics (heisenberg)?
Anyhow, have fun and always ask "why?"
--

Don snipped-for-privacy@shawcross.ca
remove the X to answer
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I'm not clever enough to answer.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Gave us:

You're too tense.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.